More on the Codex Bezae
In 2005, just after Wieland Willker had discovered the source 'document' for the Small Parchment in the Sauniere Affair, i wrote an article for the Rennes Observer discussing how the essential 'Dagobert' message was 'already' present in that source document - the Codex Bezae. All the encoder needed to do was make 4 changes and he would arrive at his/her chosen message. I had thought this was a particularly interesting coincidence. But of course not significant in any way. I must confess to wondering if the 'encoder' had tried to, as near as damn it, find a text that he could manipulate into his chosen message with very little difficulty. But as Stephen Anderson wrote;
"... i must respectfully disagree with her suggestion that the presence of much of the 'A Dagobert'...phrase in the Codex Bezae might indicate that it was there already. It certainly is possible to embed such a phrase into a text of similar length as the portion from the Codex Bezae."
Stephen of course is absolutly correct. I have seen that Thierry Garnier, on his website, discussing this source document has done exactly that. He has 'found' the phrase 'Et in Arcadia Ego ...' in the Codex Bezae (See here; http://www.portail-rennes-le-chateau.com/codex_bezae2). When i read that on the website i thought 'How rediculous, anyone can find any 'message' they want in any text!
But why was it that this particular text of the Codex Bezae was chosen to 'encode' a not so well hidden message?1 Was it because the message to encode essentially was already there after only a few changes were made? It would have been a very simple thing to do - for in the Small Parchment not only is the secret message easy to find - it was extremely easy to create precisely because not too many changes to the text were required. What this doesnt explain though is why the encoder copied Chapter 6 of Luke Verse 1 - 4 all out out by hand and then added extra bits of information (such as the dots etc over certain words) that appear to have nothing to do with the actual secret 'message'.
In hindsight i now see that it isnt really the text that is important ... it is what is going on in the rest of the Small Parchment which is significant. The encoder had wanted to draw attention to a 'key' which arguably has nothing to do with the 'concealed' message. This same key is referred to in the Larger Parchment. So did the encoder start with a blank page - put in the information that would be required to find this 'key' and then copy out the section of the Codex Bezae over the top? It must seem a possibility.
If this could be correct then when was that underlying 'code' added because the dots etc are certainly not on the original Codex Bezae? Was it Cherisey who added these for some reason or someone prior to him? In 'Tomb of God' the authors ask much the same sort of questions. In trying to find those answers they said they were able to deduce a possible date for the creation of the 'parchments'. They also recounted some interesting conversations that Henry Lincoln had had with Pierre Plantard. Regarding the Parchments Plantard had said that:
"...the fourth parchment....was the original on the basis of which the Marquis de Cherisey had devised a modified version'
What does this statement mean? According to Lincoln Sauniere had found four parchments (two were geneaolgies from 1244 and 1644) and the other two were supposed to have been texts composed by Antoine Bigou. They are generally accepted to be the Small and Large Parchments which are famous in the Rennes Affair. Which of them then is the Fourth Parchment? Is it the two Bigou documents somehow amalgamated into one Parchment? If so then what is the third parchment that Sauniere found? If the two Bigou Parchments are the third and fourth Parchments, then which one of these is the actual Fourth Parchment which became the original which Cherisey based his modified version on? Another alternative may be that Cherisey's fourth Parchment is indeed the Codex Bezae itself!
Illustrated below is the Cherisey Small Parchment as well as the orignal Codex Bezae manuscript. By comparing the two we can see what has changed between them. I find it strange that observers look at the changes to the words and possible misreading of any copyist, whether from photo or fascimilie - but they fail to comment on the other differences! It is enough to notice that there are other changes added by someone which are of great significance.
Lincoln (in regard to the Parchments and Cherisey's 'modified' version ...) later concluded that "in other words, they [the parchments] had not been 'concocted' by M. Cherisey at all. They had been copied, and M. Cherisey had made only a few additions. When these additions were deleted, what remained was the original text found by Sauniere..."
Perhaps - in the course of the history of the Bezae manuscript - at some point in time there had been copies of it made and that an unidentified person had created a copy with a specific 'code' added. Despite what Lincoln via Plantard may imply [Cherisey made a few additions] this isnt the work of Cherisey because, with respect, we do not think he was intelligent enough to create it and because the knowledge is so arcane and hidden and ancient how would he have gained access to that knowledge? Cherisey did however add the 'To Dagobert' message very recently allowing Plantard to make the comment he did.
Perhaps though, there is a theory of how this could have occurred.
What is not possible is that Cherisey 'invented' the 681 key by himself. Paul Karren has demonstrated admirably that this 'key' was known by "....a handful of others [who] appear to have had varying degrees of insight into the secrets of the device – the English clockmaker Henry Sully, the astronomer Pierre-Charles Lemonnier, and the artist Eugene Delacroix. The priest Boudet certainly knew and it appears Berenger Sauniere did as well". By extension it is also obvious that Nicolas Poussin knew of the device. Below i will discuss the possibility of how these people were connected. The 681 key is so complicated that it is an impossibility that Cherisey could have known it. He was therefore given the knowledge from elsewhere or he came into posession of it. We have to accept Plantard at his word [even though there are plenty who would not] - he said the copies made by Cherisey were based on 'very good originals'.
Below: Cherisey's copied Parchment 1 with additions and the orignal Codex Bezae manuscript.
I have scanned the article i wrote in the Rennes Observer seven years ago below - and then i will discuss my revised thoughts on the Small Parchment. Especially in light of the discussions i have had with Paul Karren about his research and discoveries.
I will take into account the suggestions that Thierry Garnier made concerning the Codex Bezae and the Small Parchment. But first here is a photo of the digitilised Codex Bezae courtesy of Cambridge University (http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-NN-00002-00041/) of the relevant folio of interest.
You will notice that in the right hand corner of the page someone has paginated it at 186. Garnier feels this is a veiled reference to 681 (we do not know who re-paginated the pages). Garnier links this to the Gospel of John folio pages in the same Codex, the Greek page as well as the Latin page. I believe Garnier thinks it is the Gospel used in the Large Parchment (both pages are pictured below, from the digital version edition of the Codex Bezae by Cambridge University). It is astonishing that the Large Parchment be indicated in this way.
Above - the Large Parchment. Taken from Codex Bezae also?
Garnier feels that all the necessary ingredients are here to explain the whole Rennes-le-Chateau Parchment enigma, from the 681 key (he believes this is the page 186 of the Codex Bezae alerting you to the Gospel of John in the same Codex) and the pages of John's Gospel in Greek - these pages carry the PAX 'logo' as well as a small ideogram that Garnier thinks is similar to the Sion 'logo' in the Large Parchment. Garnier also finds interesting letters and words which refer to Arcadia etc. You can see his thesis at this website: http://lemercuredegaillon.free.fr/gaillon27/codex_bezae.htm
This may be all well and correct. But there is no discussion about why or how the information was used. And why certain persons would go to all this trouble. And what the purpose of it all was for. Garnier suggests that it was Boudet who was the mastermind behind the creation of these Parchments. But why? How does it fit with all the other players and information?
Cherisey had told Pierre Jarnac back in 1978, that "... the Parchments of the Gospel of St Luke fabricated by me, the ancient text of which, in unical script, i picked up at the Biblioteque Nationale in the work of Dom Cabrol, l'Archaeologie Chretienne ..." But this is wrong. Cherisey never found a copy of the Codex Bezae in this publication. This Cabrol work is in the British Library. I went to check out Cherisey's statement and there is no mention of the Codex Bezae at all let alone a fascimilie of the Codex in its volume. How could Cherisey make such a stupid error? Does this call into question the entire quote of Cherisey's?
For as we know, according to Chaumeil, Cherisey told him he used the 'Dictionnaire de la Bible' (Tome 1: A-B. Editor: F. Vigouroux, Paris, 1895) to copy out the biblical script of St Luke to then compose his 'secret message'. And below is the illustration from this Vigouroux edition of 1895. Garnier appears to question this reference - querying whether this was the correct edition. So even here its possible that Cherisey has given us a wrong reference. Did he use a different edition of Vigouroux?
This may be all well and correct. But there is no discussion about why or how the information was used. And why certain persons would go to all this trouble. And what the purpose of it all was for. Garnier suggests that it was Boudet who was the mastermind behind the creation of these Parchments. But why? How does it fit with all the other players and information?
Cherisey had told Pierre Jarnac back in 1978, that "... the Parchments of the Gospel of St Luke fabricated by me, the ancient text of which, in unical script, i picked up at the Biblioteque Nationale in the work of Dom Cabrol, l'Archaeologie Chretienne ..." But this is wrong. Cherisey never found a copy of the Codex Bezae in this publication. This Cabrol work is in the British Library. I went to check out Cherisey's statement and there is no mention of the Codex Bezae at all let alone a fascimilie of the Codex in its volume. How could Cherisey make such a stupid error? Does this call into question the entire quote of Cherisey's?
For as we know, according to Chaumeil, Cherisey told him he used the 'Dictionnaire de la Bible' (Tome 1: A-B. Editor: F. Vigouroux, Paris, 1895) to copy out the biblical script of St Luke to then compose his 'secret message'. And below is the illustration from this Vigouroux edition of 1895. Garnier appears to question this reference - querying whether this was the correct edition. So even here its possible that Cherisey has given us a wrong reference. Did he use a different edition of Vigouroux?
Why would Cherisey quite blatently change his stories? A game? To keep us all on our toes? For a purpose? For a giggle?
Some researchers think that because of Cherisey's ancestry he had access to this Codex in its orignal form2. Isaac Ben Jacob thinks, for example, that as the Beza family later intermarried into the Cherisey family then our Cherisey must have known about the Codex Bezae etc. But my understanding is that this inter-marriage occurred in the 19th century. For Issac the link of importance is explained via the ‘domaine de Joncy, located in the commune of the same name, {which} was the property of a certain Baron Jacques Cottin de La Barre, which he left to his eldest daughter Madame de Latane de Puyfoucauld. Who in turn bequeathed the property to her daughter Madame de La Maisonneuve, who then left it to her own daughter, Madame Théodore de Bèze, who was the cousin of Jean René, Vicomte (Count) de Chérisey, who lived in the 20th century. A French diplomat, he inherited from his cousin the grounds of Joncy, ....The branch of the Marquis de Chérisey which interests us begins with the 3rd Marquis de Chérisey....’
How did the Chérisey family get access to the Bezae document? Even if from family connections how would Cherisey have had privileged access to it? The document itself was taken from Lyon in 1562 and delivered to the Protestant scholar Theodore Beza, the friend and successor of Calvin who gave it to the University of Cambridge in 1581. This is far too early for the possible link between the Beza family and Cherisey! So from 1581 presumably no-one had access to it. Except scholars at Cambridge? Or did the Bezae family somehow keep a copy? There was certainly a printing press at the time ....but i am not sure how this could have worked.
The recent history of the Codex and its publication are as follows: ‘Readings of the manuscript first appeared in the margin of Estienne 1550 and then in Beza's notes (see Beza 1565). It was collated for Walton's Polyglot by Archbishop Ussher and fully translated into English by Whiston (see Whiston 1745). Kipling 1793 was the first to present the text in full. For later editions see Hansell 1864, Scrivener 1864 and Cambridge 1899. Full collations are in the apparati of Tischendorf 1869 and Tregelles 1857’(http://www.bible-researcher.com/codex-d1.html).
It’s perfectly plausible that Chérisey would have known of the document without having a Bezae in the family. He could have picked up the idea to use the Codex Bezae because it is referenced in the work of Paul Le Cour. We already know that Chérisey had done this before in the Lobineau documents (see here http://www.rhedesium.com/the-tombstone-of-marie-hautpoul-de-blanchefort---key-of-a-great-secret.html). Cherisey may well have chosen this Codex because of family tradition or because of some insider knowledge that he obtained in some way. Presumably, for Chérisey, the Codex is important because of its oddities. But equally it could be none of the above theories. Did Cherisey choose it because of its history3? It had lain in the monastery of Lyon probably untouched since three or four hundred years before it was delivered to Theodore Beza. Scholars think that no additions or modifications to the Codex occurred after the 12th century which does suggest that the Codex was hidden away and perhaps forgotten about. But its origins are dated to 4th or 5th century Gaul. What was happening in Gaul when this Codex was copied and created? To look at this we must look at the history and features of the Codex itself.
The latest scholarly opinions are that this Codex was composed by a scribe who worked in a bi-lingual setting - such as a school or monastery. Here it was Latin which was the vernacular and the Greek was the Greek of eccesiastical and liturgical language. As many as 9 correctors have worked on the manuscript between the 6th and 12th century. Scrivener thought that the scribe of the Codex Bezae 'was to copy the Greek text from an existing exemplar on to the left hand side of each leaf and to translate into Latin that Greek text on the right leaf'. Some of the spelling errors have been transported from the Greek text directly to the Latin column - probably because the scribe only had a working knowledge of Greek. There is no doubt that the Greek text takes prominence.
The Greek of the Codex Bezae represents an independant and pre-exisitng textual tradition. The manuscript itself dates from the late 4th century - early 5th century. If the corrections and marginal annotations are also taken into consideration this date can be extended to 800AD. It is now thought the manuscript emerged early in a Greek speaking area before coming to the West.
Some elements of the text are found for example in Marcion. (Marcion was a bishop in early Christianity). All the evidence seems to suggest that in existence was a distinctly Western recension of the Gospel of Luke that circulated independantly to that of the other Gospels in the period before 313CE. The exemplar of the Codex Bezae was brought to Gaul around 170CE. There are historical links between Galatia and Gaul and the Codex has a long association with Southern Gaul, particularly Lyon. Supporting this scenario are two very important features which are also present in other extant ancient manuscripts of the region. One feature for example is the use of a blue ink to write the manuscripts. This feature is only associated with Lyon.
There are also quotes from Irenaeus which are similar to the Codex Bezae even down to the citing of the same errors! Scrivener speculated that the Codex Bezae was brought into Gaul by Irenaeus and his asiatic companions about AD170. The Latin of the Codex is the feature that dates it to a Western province, no later than the 5th century. Most scholars are prepared to accept that the Codex was in the hands of Saint Polycarpe (he quoted from this text) and that his successor Irenaeus took the manuscript to Lyon when he became Bishop there.
Lyon itself was founded on the Fourviere hill as a Roman colony in 43 BC by Munatius Plancus, a lieutenant of Caesar, on the site of a Gaulish hill-fort settlement called Lugodunon. Plancus was a Roman senator in 42 BC, and a censor in 22 BC. He was Julius Caesar's officer during the conquest of Gaul and in the civil war against Pompey. It was Marcus Agrippa 'who recognised that Lugdunum's position on the natural highway from northern to south-eastern France made it a natural communications hub, and he made Lyon the starting point of the
principal Roman roads throughout Gaul. It then became the capital of Gaul, partly thanks to its convenient location at the convergence of two navigable rivers, and quickly became the main city of Gaul. Two emperors were born in this city: Claudius and Caracalla. Today, the archbishop of Lyon is still referred to as "Primat des Gaules" and the city often referred to
as the "capitale des Gaules".
What about our timeline date of the scribe who copied and translated this Codex Bezae? What was happening in 4th-5th century Gaul?
"..... refugees from the destruction of Worms by the Huns in 437 were resettled by the military commander of the west, Aetius, at Lugdunum, which was formally the capital of an earlier Burgundian kingdom. The Burgundians themselves were an East Germanic tribe which may have emigrated from mainland Scandinavia to the island of Bornholm. This must have made them natural allies of the Visigoths. In the year 369, the Emperor Valentinian I enlisted the aid of the Burgundians in his war against another Germanic tribe, the Alamanni (Ammianus, XXVIII, 5, 8-15). At this time, the Burgundians were possibly living in the Vistula basin, according to the mid-6th-century historian of the Goths, Jordanes. Approximately four decades later, the Burgundians appear again. Following Stilicho's withdrawal of troops to fight Alaric I of the Visigoths in AD 406-408, the northern tribes crossed the Rhine and entered the Empire in the Germanic migrations. Among them were the Alans, Vandals, the Suevi and the Burgundians. A part of Burgundians migrated westwards and settled in the Rhine Valley.
In 411, the Burgundian king Gundahar set up a puppet emperor, Jovinus, in cooperation with Goar, king of the Alans. With the authority of the Emperor that he controlled, Gundahar
settled on the left (Roman) bank of the Rhine, between the river Lauter and the Nahe, seizing Worms, Speyer and Strassburg. Apparently as part of a truce, the Emperor Honorius later officially "granted" them the land. (Prosper, a. 386)". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgundians & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyon)
Some researchers think that because of Cherisey's ancestry he had access to this Codex in its orignal form2. Isaac Ben Jacob thinks, for example, that as the Beza family later intermarried into the Cherisey family then our Cherisey must have known about the Codex Bezae etc. But my understanding is that this inter-marriage occurred in the 19th century. For Issac the link of importance is explained via the ‘domaine de Joncy, located in the commune of the same name, {which} was the property of a certain Baron Jacques Cottin de La Barre, which he left to his eldest daughter Madame de Latane de Puyfoucauld. Who in turn bequeathed the property to her daughter Madame de La Maisonneuve, who then left it to her own daughter, Madame Théodore de Bèze, who was the cousin of Jean René, Vicomte (Count) de Chérisey, who lived in the 20th century. A French diplomat, he inherited from his cousin the grounds of Joncy, ....The branch of the Marquis de Chérisey which interests us begins with the 3rd Marquis de Chérisey....’
How did the Chérisey family get access to the Bezae document? Even if from family connections how would Cherisey have had privileged access to it? The document itself was taken from Lyon in 1562 and delivered to the Protestant scholar Theodore Beza, the friend and successor of Calvin who gave it to the University of Cambridge in 1581. This is far too early for the possible link between the Beza family and Cherisey! So from 1581 presumably no-one had access to it. Except scholars at Cambridge? Or did the Bezae family somehow keep a copy? There was certainly a printing press at the time ....but i am not sure how this could have worked.
The recent history of the Codex and its publication are as follows: ‘Readings of the manuscript first appeared in the margin of Estienne 1550 and then in Beza's notes (see Beza 1565). It was collated for Walton's Polyglot by Archbishop Ussher and fully translated into English by Whiston (see Whiston 1745). Kipling 1793 was the first to present the text in full. For later editions see Hansell 1864, Scrivener 1864 and Cambridge 1899. Full collations are in the apparati of Tischendorf 1869 and Tregelles 1857’(http://www.bible-researcher.com/codex-d1.html).
It’s perfectly plausible that Chérisey would have known of the document without having a Bezae in the family. He could have picked up the idea to use the Codex Bezae because it is referenced in the work of Paul Le Cour. We already know that Chérisey had done this before in the Lobineau documents (see here http://www.rhedesium.com/the-tombstone-of-marie-hautpoul-de-blanchefort---key-of-a-great-secret.html). Cherisey may well have chosen this Codex because of family tradition or because of some insider knowledge that he obtained in some way. Presumably, for Chérisey, the Codex is important because of its oddities. But equally it could be none of the above theories. Did Cherisey choose it because of its history3? It had lain in the monastery of Lyon probably untouched since three or four hundred years before it was delivered to Theodore Beza. Scholars think that no additions or modifications to the Codex occurred after the 12th century which does suggest that the Codex was hidden away and perhaps forgotten about. But its origins are dated to 4th or 5th century Gaul. What was happening in Gaul when this Codex was copied and created? To look at this we must look at the history and features of the Codex itself.
The latest scholarly opinions are that this Codex was composed by a scribe who worked in a bi-lingual setting - such as a school or monastery. Here it was Latin which was the vernacular and the Greek was the Greek of eccesiastical and liturgical language. As many as 9 correctors have worked on the manuscript between the 6th and 12th century. Scrivener thought that the scribe of the Codex Bezae 'was to copy the Greek text from an existing exemplar on to the left hand side of each leaf and to translate into Latin that Greek text on the right leaf'. Some of the spelling errors have been transported from the Greek text directly to the Latin column - probably because the scribe only had a working knowledge of Greek. There is no doubt that the Greek text takes prominence.
The Greek of the Codex Bezae represents an independant and pre-exisitng textual tradition. The manuscript itself dates from the late 4th century - early 5th century. If the corrections and marginal annotations are also taken into consideration this date can be extended to 800AD. It is now thought the manuscript emerged early in a Greek speaking area before coming to the West.
Some elements of the text are found for example in Marcion. (Marcion was a bishop in early Christianity). All the evidence seems to suggest that in existence was a distinctly Western recension of the Gospel of Luke that circulated independantly to that of the other Gospels in the period before 313CE. The exemplar of the Codex Bezae was brought to Gaul around 170CE. There are historical links between Galatia and Gaul and the Codex has a long association with Southern Gaul, particularly Lyon. Supporting this scenario are two very important features which are also present in other extant ancient manuscripts of the region. One feature for example is the use of a blue ink to write the manuscripts. This feature is only associated with Lyon.
There are also quotes from Irenaeus which are similar to the Codex Bezae even down to the citing of the same errors! Scrivener speculated that the Codex Bezae was brought into Gaul by Irenaeus and his asiatic companions about AD170. The Latin of the Codex is the feature that dates it to a Western province, no later than the 5th century. Most scholars are prepared to accept that the Codex was in the hands of Saint Polycarpe (he quoted from this text) and that his successor Irenaeus took the manuscript to Lyon when he became Bishop there.
Lyon itself was founded on the Fourviere hill as a Roman colony in 43 BC by Munatius Plancus, a lieutenant of Caesar, on the site of a Gaulish hill-fort settlement called Lugodunon. Plancus was a Roman senator in 42 BC, and a censor in 22 BC. He was Julius Caesar's officer during the conquest of Gaul and in the civil war against Pompey. It was Marcus Agrippa 'who recognised that Lugdunum's position on the natural highway from northern to south-eastern France made it a natural communications hub, and he made Lyon the starting point of the
principal Roman roads throughout Gaul. It then became the capital of Gaul, partly thanks to its convenient location at the convergence of two navigable rivers, and quickly became the main city of Gaul. Two emperors were born in this city: Claudius and Caracalla. Today, the archbishop of Lyon is still referred to as "Primat des Gaules" and the city often referred to
as the "capitale des Gaules".
What about our timeline date of the scribe who copied and translated this Codex Bezae? What was happening in 4th-5th century Gaul?
"..... refugees from the destruction of Worms by the Huns in 437 were resettled by the military commander of the west, Aetius, at Lugdunum, which was formally the capital of an earlier Burgundian kingdom. The Burgundians themselves were an East Germanic tribe which may have emigrated from mainland Scandinavia to the island of Bornholm. This must have made them natural allies of the Visigoths. In the year 369, the Emperor Valentinian I enlisted the aid of the Burgundians in his war against another Germanic tribe, the Alamanni (Ammianus, XXVIII, 5, 8-15). At this time, the Burgundians were possibly living in the Vistula basin, according to the mid-6th-century historian of the Goths, Jordanes. Approximately four decades later, the Burgundians appear again. Following Stilicho's withdrawal of troops to fight Alaric I of the Visigoths in AD 406-408, the northern tribes crossed the Rhine and entered the Empire in the Germanic migrations. Among them were the Alans, Vandals, the Suevi and the Burgundians. A part of Burgundians migrated westwards and settled in the Rhine Valley.
In 411, the Burgundian king Gundahar set up a puppet emperor, Jovinus, in cooperation with Goar, king of the Alans. With the authority of the Emperor that he controlled, Gundahar
settled on the left (Roman) bank of the Rhine, between the river Lauter and the Nahe, seizing Worms, Speyer and Strassburg. Apparently as part of a truce, the Emperor Honorius later officially "granted" them the land. (Prosper, a. 386)". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgundians & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyon)
Above - The Second Burgundian Kingdom between 443 and 476 correlating to the timeline of the creation of the Codex Bezae in the area of Lyon and perhaps into early 5th century Burgundy (this is when Clovis, king of the Franks, married the Burgundian princess Clotilda (daughter of Chilperic) who converted him to the Catholic faith).
"Clotilde was born at the Burgundian court of Lyon the daughter of King Chilperic II of Burgundy. Upon the death of Chilperic's father King Gondioc in 473, he and his brothers Gundobad and Godegisel had divided their heritage; Chilperic II apparently reigning at Lyon, Gundobald at Vienne and Godegesil at Geneva. Clotilde was brought up in the Catholic faith and did not rest until her husband had abjured Arianism and embraced the Catholic faith (according to Gregory of Tours' Historia Francorum in the middle of battle with the Alemanni at Tolbiac in 496. He officially converted the same year, baptised by Bishop Remigius of Reims. With him she built at Paris the Church of the Holy Apostles, afterwards known as the Abbey of St Genevieve. After Clovis' death in 511, she retired to the Abbey of St. Martin at Tours".
Somewhere in the east the Burgundians themselves had converted to the Arian form of Christianity from their native Germanic polytheism. Their Arianism proved a source of suspicion and distrust between the Burgundians and the Western Roman Empire. Divisions were evidently healed circa AD 500, however, as Gundobad, one of the last Burgundian kings, maintained a close personal friendship with Avitus, the bishop of Vienne. Moreover, Gundobad's son and successor, Sigismund, was himself a Catholic and there is evidence that many of the Burgundian people had converted by this time as well including several female members of the ruling family.
This then is the historical background to the creation of the Codex Bezae. The presence at Lyon of the numerous Asiatic Christians and their almost daily communications with the Orient were likely to arouse the susceptibilities of the Gallo-Romans. This indeed led to persecution under Marcus Aurelius. Its victims at Lyon consisted of those of Greek origin as well as those who were of Gallo-Roman extraction. Among those killed were Saint Blandina and Saint Pothinus, first Bishop of Lyon, sent to Gaul by Saint Polycarp about the middle of the 2nd century. The letter addressed to the Christians of Asia and Phrygia in the name of the faithful of Vienne and Lyon, and relating the persecution of 177 is considered by Ernest Renan as one of the most extraordinary documents possessed by any literature; he called it the baptismal certificate of Christianity in France. The successor of Saint Pothinus was the illustrious Saint Irenaeus (177-202).
There are also numerous funerary inscriptions of primitive Christianity in Lyon; the earliest dates from the year 334. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries, the See of Lyon enjoyed great renown throughout Gaul, with the witness of the local legends of Besançon and of several other cities relative to the missionaries sent out by Saint Irenaeus. At the end of the empire and during the Merovingian period several saints are counted among the Bishops of Lyon: Saint Justus (374-381) who died in a monastery in the Thebaid (Egypt) and was renowned for the orthodoxy of his doctrine in the struggle against Arianism, Saint Alpinus and Saint Martin (disciple of Saint Martin of Tours; end of 4th century); Saint Antiochus (400-410); Saint Elpidius (410-422); Saint Sicarius (422-33); Saint Eucherius (c. 433-50), a monk of Lérins and the author of homilies, from whom doubtless dates the foundation at Lyon of the "hermitages", Saint Patiens (456-98) who successfully combated the famine and Arianism, and whom Sidonius Apollinaris praised in a poem; Saint Lupicinus (491-94) and Saint Rusticus (494-501). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyon)
The famous Saint Eucherius, a Bishop of Lyon, thought that he might join the anchorites in the deserts of the East and he consulted John Cassian, the famed hermit who had returned from the East to Marseille; Cassian dedicated the second set of his Collationes (Numbers 11-17) to Eucherius and Honoratus. These Conferences describe the daily lives of the hermits of the Egyptian Thebaid and discuss the important themes of grace, free will, and Scripture.
The religous milieu at this time in Lyon seems to be the conflict between Arianism and the Catholic faith coupled with the idea of 'monks' living as hermits and living a monastic kind of life. In this milieu a monk or scribe copied an ancient and valuable Greek text which originated perhaps with descendants of the Apostles during the time of Jesus Christ in the East which had made its way to the West by the 4th century.
Later this same manuscipt had fallen into the hands of Theodore Beza, who then used it to write and publish his New Testament in three languages including the venacular which surely agitated the Catholic and Papal heirarchy. Why? Because it would enable ordinary citizens to read the Bible in their own language which meant the Church would lose some of its control over the populace in regard to teachings of Jesus.
Below is a scan of Beza's New Testament including the section of Chapter 6 of Luke Verse 1 - 4 which he could only have been taken from the later named Codex Bezae.
"Clotilde was born at the Burgundian court of Lyon the daughter of King Chilperic II of Burgundy. Upon the death of Chilperic's father King Gondioc in 473, he and his brothers Gundobad and Godegisel had divided their heritage; Chilperic II apparently reigning at Lyon, Gundobald at Vienne and Godegesil at Geneva. Clotilde was brought up in the Catholic faith and did not rest until her husband had abjured Arianism and embraced the Catholic faith (according to Gregory of Tours' Historia Francorum in the middle of battle with the Alemanni at Tolbiac in 496. He officially converted the same year, baptised by Bishop Remigius of Reims. With him she built at Paris the Church of the Holy Apostles, afterwards known as the Abbey of St Genevieve. After Clovis' death in 511, she retired to the Abbey of St. Martin at Tours".
Somewhere in the east the Burgundians themselves had converted to the Arian form of Christianity from their native Germanic polytheism. Their Arianism proved a source of suspicion and distrust between the Burgundians and the Western Roman Empire. Divisions were evidently healed circa AD 500, however, as Gundobad, one of the last Burgundian kings, maintained a close personal friendship with Avitus, the bishop of Vienne. Moreover, Gundobad's son and successor, Sigismund, was himself a Catholic and there is evidence that many of the Burgundian people had converted by this time as well including several female members of the ruling family.
This then is the historical background to the creation of the Codex Bezae. The presence at Lyon of the numerous Asiatic Christians and their almost daily communications with the Orient were likely to arouse the susceptibilities of the Gallo-Romans. This indeed led to persecution under Marcus Aurelius. Its victims at Lyon consisted of those of Greek origin as well as those who were of Gallo-Roman extraction. Among those killed were Saint Blandina and Saint Pothinus, first Bishop of Lyon, sent to Gaul by Saint Polycarp about the middle of the 2nd century. The letter addressed to the Christians of Asia and Phrygia in the name of the faithful of Vienne and Lyon, and relating the persecution of 177 is considered by Ernest Renan as one of the most extraordinary documents possessed by any literature; he called it the baptismal certificate of Christianity in France. The successor of Saint Pothinus was the illustrious Saint Irenaeus (177-202).
There are also numerous funerary inscriptions of primitive Christianity in Lyon; the earliest dates from the year 334. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries, the See of Lyon enjoyed great renown throughout Gaul, with the witness of the local legends of Besançon and of several other cities relative to the missionaries sent out by Saint Irenaeus. At the end of the empire and during the Merovingian period several saints are counted among the Bishops of Lyon: Saint Justus (374-381) who died in a monastery in the Thebaid (Egypt) and was renowned for the orthodoxy of his doctrine in the struggle against Arianism, Saint Alpinus and Saint Martin (disciple of Saint Martin of Tours; end of 4th century); Saint Antiochus (400-410); Saint Elpidius (410-422); Saint Sicarius (422-33); Saint Eucherius (c. 433-50), a monk of Lérins and the author of homilies, from whom doubtless dates the foundation at Lyon of the "hermitages", Saint Patiens (456-98) who successfully combated the famine and Arianism, and whom Sidonius Apollinaris praised in a poem; Saint Lupicinus (491-94) and Saint Rusticus (494-501). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyon)
The famous Saint Eucherius, a Bishop of Lyon, thought that he might join the anchorites in the deserts of the East and he consulted John Cassian, the famed hermit who had returned from the East to Marseille; Cassian dedicated the second set of his Collationes (Numbers 11-17) to Eucherius and Honoratus. These Conferences describe the daily lives of the hermits of the Egyptian Thebaid and discuss the important themes of grace, free will, and Scripture.
The religous milieu at this time in Lyon seems to be the conflict between Arianism and the Catholic faith coupled with the idea of 'monks' living as hermits and living a monastic kind of life. In this milieu a monk or scribe copied an ancient and valuable Greek text which originated perhaps with descendants of the Apostles during the time of Jesus Christ in the East which had made its way to the West by the 4th century.
Later this same manuscipt had fallen into the hands of Theodore Beza, who then used it to write and publish his New Testament in three languages including the venacular which surely agitated the Catholic and Papal heirarchy. Why? Because it would enable ordinary citizens to read the Bible in their own language which meant the Church would lose some of its control over the populace in regard to teachings of Jesus.
Below is a scan of Beza's New Testament including the section of Chapter 6 of Luke Verse 1 - 4 which he could only have been taken from the later named Codex Bezae.
Above: Testamentum Novum Publisher: Geneva: Henri Estienne, 1588. Author: Theodore Beza
How did Beza get the original manuscript of the Codex Bezae?
There is indeed an enigma regarding how he obtained the manuscript. Beza, in a handwritten note to Cambridge University, apparently said he was given it from the Monastery of St Ireneus in Lyon. But as Scrivener has pointed out Beza says that he received it as a 'present' from these Lyoniase monks possibly to protect the manscript during the Wars of Religion. But why give it to Beza? The Lyonaise monks would be handing their most prized possession straight into the hands of their enemies. Beza was a champion of the Reformation and a good friend of John Calvin. The Wars of Religion were precisely battled against the Catholics and these Reformers.
We may ask why the monks at the Monastery of Irenaeus would have handed such a valuable document to Reformers?
Theodore Beza was born at Vezelay, in Burgundy, France. The fact that he grew up in Burgundy is interesting. His father, Pierre de Beze, royal governor of Vezelay, descended from a Burgundian family of distinction; his mother was Marie Bourdelot. Beza's father had two brothers; Nicholas, who was member of Parliament at Paris; and Claude, who was abbot of the Cistercian monastery Froimont. After a serious illness Theodore revealed that he accepted some spiritual needs. Gradually he came to accept salvation in Christ which lifted his spirits. He then resolved to sever his connections of the time and went to Geneva, the French city of refuge for Evangelicals (adherents of the Reformation movement), where he arrived with Claudine on October 23, 1548. He was received by John Calvin, who had met him already in Wolmar's house, and was married in the church. Beza was at a loss for immediate
occupation, so he went to Tübingen to see his former teacher Wolmar. On his way
home he visited Pierre Viret at Lausanne, who brought about his appointment as professor of Greek at the academy there (Nov 1549).
In 1557, Beza took a special interest in the Waldensians of Piedmont, who were being harassed by the French government. Beza made a declaration concerning the Waldensians' views on the sacrament on May 14, 1557. The written declaration clearly stated their position and was well
received by the Lutheran theologians, but was strongly disapproved of in Bern and Zurich. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Beza)
The Waldensians are names for a Christian movement of the later Middle Ages. They were persecuted as heretical in the 12th century onwards. The Waldensians are named after Peter of Waldo, in the sources said to be a wealthy merchant from Lyons and a man of some learning. Sometime shortly before the year 1160 he was inspired by a series of events, firstly, after hearing a sermon on the life of St. Alexius, secondly, when rejection of transubstantiation was made a capital crime, thirdly, the sudden and unexpected death of a friend during an evening meal. From this point onward he began living a radical Christian life giving his property over to his wife, while the remainder of his belongings he distributed as alms to the poor.
At about this time Waldo began to preach and teach publicly based on his ideas of simplicity and poverty. He railed against the Papal excesses and also Catholic dogmas, including purgatory and transubstantiation while accusing them of being the harlot from the book of Revelation. By
1170 he had gathered a large number of followers who were referred to as the Poor of Lyons, the Poor of Lombardy, or the Poor of God who would spread their teaching abroad while disguised as peddlers. They were distinct from the Albigensians or Cathari. The Waldensian movement was characterized from the beginning by lay preaching, voluntary poverty and strict adherence to the Bible. Between 1175-1185 Peter Waldo either commissioned a cleric from Lyon to translate the New Testament into the vernacular, the Arpitan (Franco-Provençal) language or was himself involved in this translation work. Regardless of the source of translation, he is credited with providing to Europe the first translation of the Bible in a 'modern tongue' outside of Latin. In 1179, Waldo and one of his disciples went to Rome where they were welcomed by Pope Alexander III, and the Roman Curia. They had to explain their faith before a panel of three clergymen, including issues which were then debated within the Church, as the universal priesthood, the gospel in the vulgar tongue, and the issue of self-imposed poverty. The results of the meeting were inconclusive, and Waldo's ideas, but not the movement itself, were condemned at the Third Lateran Council in the same year, though the leaders of the movement had not been yet excommunicated.
What is interesting is what was really at stake here. The Waldensian dispute centered on the issue of authority. It was the fact that the Waldensians translated the scriptures, studied them, and "presumed" to preach what they believed, without reference to the clergy that became unacceptable. Melia declares;
. . .when John a Bellismanibus, Archbishop of Lyons, about the year 1182 . . .forbade them both to preach and . . .expelled them from his diocese; no mention was made of their holding any doctrine at variance with the teaching of the Church: they were simply expelled because, being laymen and illiterate, . . . they presumed, against the prohibition of their superiors, to preach, and exercise an office which was confided to the Apostles and to their successors only.
They were arguing that they could draw insight directly from the pages of their translated Bibles rather than from the Roman Church. As one of the earliest sources, Alan of Lille put it, in his chapter entitled, "By what authority and for what reason it is shown that no one ought to preach unless he has permission from the Bishop,"
There are certain heretics. . .called Waldenses, after their heresiarch, who was named Waldus, who--led by his emotions, not sent by God--founded a new sect and presumed to preach without the authority of the Bishop, without divine inspiration, without knowledge, and without literacy. He was an irrational philosopher, a prophet without a vision, an apostle without a mission, a teacher without an instructor, and his foolish disciples have led the simple folk astray in many parts of the world
According to one report from an inquisition prosecution found in Church archives in Carcassonne, France, the movement known as the "Poor of Lyons" began in about 1170. The document goes on to state that Waldo himself had been a rich merchant who underwent a religious experience which led him to renounce all of his wealth, and ". . .observe a life of poverty and evangelical perfection, as the Apostles." This sort of commitment can hardly be
considered unusual during this period of history. However, Waldo went further:
"He arranged for the Gospels and some other books of the Bible to be translated in common speech . . . which he read very often, though without understanding their import. Infatuated with himself, he usurped the prerogatives of the Apostles by presuming to preach the Gospel in the streets, where he made many disciples, and involving them, both men and women, in a like presumption by sending them out, in turn, to preach.
These people, ignorant and illiterate, went about through the towns, entering houses and even churches, spreading many errors round about."
Here the heart of what the Poor were all about as well as the crux of their dispute with the Roman Church is evident. Gui goes on later,
The principal heresy, then, of the aforesaid Waldensians was and still remains the contempt for ecclesiastical power. Excommunicated for this reason and delivered to Satan, they were precipitated into innumerable errors. . . The erring followers and sacrilegious masters of this sect hold and teach that they are not subject to the lord pope or Roman pontiff or to any prelates of the Roman Church. .
The roots of the Protestant Reformation also has its own roots in these ideas. This Reformation was the 16th-century schism within Western Christianity initiated by Martin Luther, John Calvin and other early Protestants. It was sparked by the 1517 posting of Luther's Ninety-five theses. The Reformation began as an attempt to reform the Roman Catholic Church, by priests who opposed what they perceived as false doctrines and ecclesiastic malpractice—especially the teaching and the sale of indulgences or the abuses of the Indulgences and simony, the selling and buying of clerical offices—that the reformers saw as evidence of the systemic corruption of the Church's Roman hierarchy which included the Pope. Luther himself owed much of his inspiration to John Wycliffe and the Lollardy concept of the "Church of the Saved", an invisible true Church which was the community of the faithful, which overlapped with, but was not the same as the visible Catholic Church. It advocated apostolic poverty and taxation of Church properties. Other doctrines include consubstantiation instead of transubstantiation.
In France the Protestant movement adherents were known as Huguenots. During the ransacking of the Churches by the Huguenotsthe Codex Bezae was somehow rescued by the monks at the Monastery in Lyon and handed over to Theodora Beza. Why? Too protect it from the sack being perpetrated by the Reformers? But Beza was on the 'side' of the Reformers.
They probably handed it to him however, because of his erudite learning and associations perhaps with Cambridge University. Beza later gifted the manuscript to this University.
Because Beza had the manuscript and it was to be the source of a coded document with a notorious 681 key known to Poussin and Teniers - would it have been with Beza and his associations that led to it being encoded? As we can see below - there was ample opportunity for this to happen - not only was he in posession of the manuscript for 19 years before handing it to Cambridge (a 19 years in which he could have shown it to many of his associates) but he also mixed with minds who most certainly could have known how to code a specific key. They certainly were mathematicians and mapmakers and also weighed with a religious conviction perhaps important enough for them to encode a key! And these people and the circles they moved in certainly had connections with those who categorically had links with those at Saint Sulpice (where the key is also encoded) and with the artists who encoded the key in art work and with those who lived in area of Arques and Rennes-le-Chateau.
What we are looking at is a very ancient coding system which was utilised at Saint Sulpice, in works of art and in the manuscript (Small Parchment) allegedly created by Cherisey. The earliest date for it appears to be 1618. As the discoverer of the 'key' said regarding its secrecy;
"... [it] implies a symbolic or practical importance. The question of why it has remained secret ... suggest[s] that this device also has a cartographic aspect and that this describes the environs of Rennes les Bains. If this is true then whatever was or is hidden there is the primary significance of the Armature. I have only partially worked out the cartographic elements – certain elements remain elusive. Given the secrecy this implies that whatever is hidden is or was important".
Can a key found in a Cherisey parchment really date back to 1618 and suggest something hidden at Rennes les Bains and which has a relationship to Saint Sulpice?
Let us begin with the deposition of the Codex Bezae manuscript at Cambridge University in around 1581. Theodore Beza presented it to them as a gift. Presumably this would have been a valuable and important manuscript in the backdrop to the religious wars that were current then. Would those high calibre studets at the time (and even many years after 1581) interested in religion have been able to see the manuscript? Who attended the University as students at this time?
There was John Dee, from November 1542 to 1546 – who attended St. John's College, Cambridge. He was a student here long before the Codex reached Cambridge - but he was a very good friend of Francis Bacon. He may have seen the Codex in the 19 years when Beza had the manuscript. How? Because if he was a close friend of Bacon's, circumstantial evidence suggests he may have known Beza via the two Bacon brothers. His great abilities were recognised early on and he was made a founding fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. In the late 1540s and early 1550s he travelled around Europe, lecturing in Paris on Euclid. He studied with and became a close friend of the cartographer Gerardus Mercator, returning to England with an important collection of mathematical and astronomical instruments. In 1552, he met Gerolamo Cardano in London - Dee owned an important collection of maps, globes and astronomical instruments. Dee was an intensely pious Christian but his Christianity was deeply influenced by the Hermetic and Platonic-Pythagorean doctrines that were pervasive in the Renaissance. He believed that numbers were the basis of all things and the key to knowledge, that God's creation was an act of numbering. Through Hermeticism he believed that man had the potential for divine power and he believed this divine power could be exercised through mathematics. His ultimate goal was to help bring forth a unified world religion through the healing of the breach of the Catholic and Protestant churches and the recapture of the pure theology of the ancients. This indeed echoed the aims of the later Rosicrucians.
Francis Bacon himself entered the same Trinity College at Cambridge, on 5 April 1573 at the age of twelve, living for three years there with his older brother Anthony Bacon under the personal tutelage of Dr John Whitgift, future Archbishop of Canterbury. The Bacon's education was conducted largely in Latin and followed the medieval curriculum. It was at Cambridge that Francis met Queen Elizabeth, who was impressed by his precocious intellect, and was accustomed to calling him "the young Lord Keeper".
The Bacon family had long links with the Protestant movement and connections with that same Reformation movement in France. The father of Francis and Anthony Bacon was Sir Nicholas Bacon, a loyal English churchman who was interested in ecclesiastical matters and made suggestions for the better observation of doctrine and discipline in the church. He favoured closer links with foreign Protestants in France. Their mother, Anne Bacon, was a leading Lady-in-Waiting to Queen Elizabeth. Anne's religious views remained strongly Puritan and she called for the eradication of all Popery in the Church of England. Anne wrote many letters that were fervent with her passion for her Protestant beliefs.
Francis's brother Anthony traveled to France in 1580. While there, he served as an intelligencer reporting to English spymaster Sir Francis Walsingham, also a Protestant sympathiser. Walsingham in fact attended King's College, Cambridge, in 1548 with many other Protestants but as an undergraduate of high social status did not sit for a degree. From
1550 or 1551, he travelled in continental Europe, returning to England by 1552 to enrol at Gray's Inn, one of the qualifying bodies for English lawyers. Walsingham became active in soliciting support for the Huguenots in France and developed a friendly and close working relationship with Nicholas Throckmorton. In 1570 the Queen chose Walsingham to support the Huguenots in their negotiations with Charles IX of France. Charles was third son of King Henry II of France and Catherine de' Medici. One of their daughters married Henri of Navarre - who himself later married Marie de Medici. It is this Marie de Medici who entrusted to the younger painter Nicolas Poussin a secret mission. The mission was to her uncle the Grand Duke of Florence. The reason for this ‘mission’ has never been divulged. It was never discussed by Poussin during his whole life time. He did not even disclose it to his biographers.
Anthony Bacon lived with Beza for 5 months in 1581, the year that Beza gave the Codex Bezae to Cambridge. Anthony Bacon later travelled on the continent as an intelligencer for
Walsingham, Burghley and the Queen as stated above. Anthony, who left England in September 1579 for a ‘tour’ of the continent, sent back to his brother a constant stream of intelligence as well as a supply of books and manuscripts to support their literary work. He also helped to set up Francis’ special twelve-month journey (1581-2) to France, Spain, Italy, Germany and Denmark to observe people, places, culture and religion. When Anthony returned in 1592 from twelve years abroad as an intelligencer to aid Francis, a private scrivenery was established, funded mainly by Anthony’s modest inherited wealth together with a lot of borrowing. Francis referred to these helpers as his ‘good pens’. Anthony Bacon’s foreign contacts were widespread , and he enjoyed friendship in many high places. His contacts in France and friendship with Henri of Navarre, later Henri IV of France, as also the experience of his close association with Antonio Perez, the King of Spain’s Secretary of State. Perez, who defected and came to England in 1593, was supported financially by Anthony Bacon. (http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/essays/frameset-essays.html)
These ‘good pens’ included scholars, lawyers, university wits and poets who acted as secretaries, writers, translators, copyists and cryptographers, dealing with correspondence, translations, copying, ciphers, essays, books, plays, entertainments and masques. Whether they were all employed by Francis and Anthony, or simply collaborated voluntarily on certain
projects, we don’t know, but some of them certainly were directly employed. Names included in these projects included Philip Sidney, an English poet, courtier and soldier, who is remembered as one of the most prominent figures of the Elizabethan Age. His works include The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia. He later married Frances, the teenage daughter of Sir Francis Walsingham.
We can see that Beza mixed with minds who could indeed create a great mathematical cryptic code. Was it these minds that decided to encode something important? Something that in some way related to the much later Cherisey creating his Small Parchment? Something that was important and pertained to Rennes-le-Chateau? There must indeed be a connection somewhere - because the key found in the Small Parchment is that of Poussin and Teniers who also guard this 681 key. This same key can be found encoded at Saint Sulpice and was known to men around the time of the 1650's when this great church was rebuilt. Did Olier know of it?
If the Bacons and Beza were aware of something important in France, in the area of Arques, this may have been through Bacon's association with the Duke de Joyeuse (they owned the land that the so called Poussin tomb was built on in Arques).
I leave the last word to Paul Karren;
"Many clues suggest that this device [the 681 key] also has a cartographic aspect and that this describes the environs of Rennes les Bains. If this is true then whatever was or is hidden there is the primary significance of the Armature. I have only partially worked out the cartographic elements – certain elements remain elusive. Given the secrecy this implies that whatever is hidden is or was important".
Perhaps it is related to the folk legend of the important burial or burials in the environs of Rennes les Bains? Is it possible that it has a basis in truth? Abbe Henri Boudet certainly referred to this in his published works and Paul Karren has identified the hand of Boudet in the Parchments and the 681 key.
Perhaps it is not so strange then that the Small Parchment should carry cartographic elements and a 681 key for the area of Rennes les Bains. But what has it to do with Saint Sulpice? Why was Poussin involved? It seems impossible that Cherisey devised this code, pulled out all these strands of historical interest and connections with such precision independantly. And this code itself currently relates to the Small Parchment. Work has not even started on the Large Parchment - which promises to yield even more interesting results!
How did Beza get the original manuscript of the Codex Bezae?
There is indeed an enigma regarding how he obtained the manuscript. Beza, in a handwritten note to Cambridge University, apparently said he was given it from the Monastery of St Ireneus in Lyon. But as Scrivener has pointed out Beza says that he received it as a 'present' from these Lyoniase monks possibly to protect the manscript during the Wars of Religion. But why give it to Beza? The Lyonaise monks would be handing their most prized possession straight into the hands of their enemies. Beza was a champion of the Reformation and a good friend of John Calvin. The Wars of Religion were precisely battled against the Catholics and these Reformers.
We may ask why the monks at the Monastery of Irenaeus would have handed such a valuable document to Reformers?
Theodore Beza was born at Vezelay, in Burgundy, France. The fact that he grew up in Burgundy is interesting. His father, Pierre de Beze, royal governor of Vezelay, descended from a Burgundian family of distinction; his mother was Marie Bourdelot. Beza's father had two brothers; Nicholas, who was member of Parliament at Paris; and Claude, who was abbot of the Cistercian monastery Froimont. After a serious illness Theodore revealed that he accepted some spiritual needs. Gradually he came to accept salvation in Christ which lifted his spirits. He then resolved to sever his connections of the time and went to Geneva, the French city of refuge for Evangelicals (adherents of the Reformation movement), where he arrived with Claudine on October 23, 1548. He was received by John Calvin, who had met him already in Wolmar's house, and was married in the church. Beza was at a loss for immediate
occupation, so he went to Tübingen to see his former teacher Wolmar. On his way
home he visited Pierre Viret at Lausanne, who brought about his appointment as professor of Greek at the academy there (Nov 1549).
In 1557, Beza took a special interest in the Waldensians of Piedmont, who were being harassed by the French government. Beza made a declaration concerning the Waldensians' views on the sacrament on May 14, 1557. The written declaration clearly stated their position and was well
received by the Lutheran theologians, but was strongly disapproved of in Bern and Zurich. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Beza)
The Waldensians are names for a Christian movement of the later Middle Ages. They were persecuted as heretical in the 12th century onwards. The Waldensians are named after Peter of Waldo, in the sources said to be a wealthy merchant from Lyons and a man of some learning. Sometime shortly before the year 1160 he was inspired by a series of events, firstly, after hearing a sermon on the life of St. Alexius, secondly, when rejection of transubstantiation was made a capital crime, thirdly, the sudden and unexpected death of a friend during an evening meal. From this point onward he began living a radical Christian life giving his property over to his wife, while the remainder of his belongings he distributed as alms to the poor.
At about this time Waldo began to preach and teach publicly based on his ideas of simplicity and poverty. He railed against the Papal excesses and also Catholic dogmas, including purgatory and transubstantiation while accusing them of being the harlot from the book of Revelation. By
1170 he had gathered a large number of followers who were referred to as the Poor of Lyons, the Poor of Lombardy, or the Poor of God who would spread their teaching abroad while disguised as peddlers. They were distinct from the Albigensians or Cathari. The Waldensian movement was characterized from the beginning by lay preaching, voluntary poverty and strict adherence to the Bible. Between 1175-1185 Peter Waldo either commissioned a cleric from Lyon to translate the New Testament into the vernacular, the Arpitan (Franco-Provençal) language or was himself involved in this translation work. Regardless of the source of translation, he is credited with providing to Europe the first translation of the Bible in a 'modern tongue' outside of Latin. In 1179, Waldo and one of his disciples went to Rome where they were welcomed by Pope Alexander III, and the Roman Curia. They had to explain their faith before a panel of three clergymen, including issues which were then debated within the Church, as the universal priesthood, the gospel in the vulgar tongue, and the issue of self-imposed poverty. The results of the meeting were inconclusive, and Waldo's ideas, but not the movement itself, were condemned at the Third Lateran Council in the same year, though the leaders of the movement had not been yet excommunicated.
What is interesting is what was really at stake here. The Waldensian dispute centered on the issue of authority. It was the fact that the Waldensians translated the scriptures, studied them, and "presumed" to preach what they believed, without reference to the clergy that became unacceptable. Melia declares;
. . .when John a Bellismanibus, Archbishop of Lyons, about the year 1182 . . .forbade them both to preach and . . .expelled them from his diocese; no mention was made of their holding any doctrine at variance with the teaching of the Church: they were simply expelled because, being laymen and illiterate, . . . they presumed, against the prohibition of their superiors, to preach, and exercise an office which was confided to the Apostles and to their successors only.
They were arguing that they could draw insight directly from the pages of their translated Bibles rather than from the Roman Church. As one of the earliest sources, Alan of Lille put it, in his chapter entitled, "By what authority and for what reason it is shown that no one ought to preach unless he has permission from the Bishop,"
There are certain heretics. . .called Waldenses, after their heresiarch, who was named Waldus, who--led by his emotions, not sent by God--founded a new sect and presumed to preach without the authority of the Bishop, without divine inspiration, without knowledge, and without literacy. He was an irrational philosopher, a prophet without a vision, an apostle without a mission, a teacher without an instructor, and his foolish disciples have led the simple folk astray in many parts of the world
According to one report from an inquisition prosecution found in Church archives in Carcassonne, France, the movement known as the "Poor of Lyons" began in about 1170. The document goes on to state that Waldo himself had been a rich merchant who underwent a religious experience which led him to renounce all of his wealth, and ". . .observe a life of poverty and evangelical perfection, as the Apostles." This sort of commitment can hardly be
considered unusual during this period of history. However, Waldo went further:
"He arranged for the Gospels and some other books of the Bible to be translated in common speech . . . which he read very often, though without understanding their import. Infatuated with himself, he usurped the prerogatives of the Apostles by presuming to preach the Gospel in the streets, where he made many disciples, and involving them, both men and women, in a like presumption by sending them out, in turn, to preach.
These people, ignorant and illiterate, went about through the towns, entering houses and even churches, spreading many errors round about."
Here the heart of what the Poor were all about as well as the crux of their dispute with the Roman Church is evident. Gui goes on later,
The principal heresy, then, of the aforesaid Waldensians was and still remains the contempt for ecclesiastical power. Excommunicated for this reason and delivered to Satan, they were precipitated into innumerable errors. . . The erring followers and sacrilegious masters of this sect hold and teach that they are not subject to the lord pope or Roman pontiff or to any prelates of the Roman Church. .
The roots of the Protestant Reformation also has its own roots in these ideas. This Reformation was the 16th-century schism within Western Christianity initiated by Martin Luther, John Calvin and other early Protestants. It was sparked by the 1517 posting of Luther's Ninety-five theses. The Reformation began as an attempt to reform the Roman Catholic Church, by priests who opposed what they perceived as false doctrines and ecclesiastic malpractice—especially the teaching and the sale of indulgences or the abuses of the Indulgences and simony, the selling and buying of clerical offices—that the reformers saw as evidence of the systemic corruption of the Church's Roman hierarchy which included the Pope. Luther himself owed much of his inspiration to John Wycliffe and the Lollardy concept of the "Church of the Saved", an invisible true Church which was the community of the faithful, which overlapped with, but was not the same as the visible Catholic Church. It advocated apostolic poverty and taxation of Church properties. Other doctrines include consubstantiation instead of transubstantiation.
In France the Protestant movement adherents were known as Huguenots. During the ransacking of the Churches by the Huguenotsthe Codex Bezae was somehow rescued by the monks at the Monastery in Lyon and handed over to Theodora Beza. Why? Too protect it from the sack being perpetrated by the Reformers? But Beza was on the 'side' of the Reformers.
They probably handed it to him however, because of his erudite learning and associations perhaps with Cambridge University. Beza later gifted the manuscript to this University.
Because Beza had the manuscript and it was to be the source of a coded document with a notorious 681 key known to Poussin and Teniers - would it have been with Beza and his associations that led to it being encoded? As we can see below - there was ample opportunity for this to happen - not only was he in posession of the manuscript for 19 years before handing it to Cambridge (a 19 years in which he could have shown it to many of his associates) but he also mixed with minds who most certainly could have known how to code a specific key. They certainly were mathematicians and mapmakers and also weighed with a religious conviction perhaps important enough for them to encode a key! And these people and the circles they moved in certainly had connections with those who categorically had links with those at Saint Sulpice (where the key is also encoded) and with the artists who encoded the key in art work and with those who lived in area of Arques and Rennes-le-Chateau.
What we are looking at is a very ancient coding system which was utilised at Saint Sulpice, in works of art and in the manuscript (Small Parchment) allegedly created by Cherisey. The earliest date for it appears to be 1618. As the discoverer of the 'key' said regarding its secrecy;
"... [it] implies a symbolic or practical importance. The question of why it has remained secret ... suggest[s] that this device also has a cartographic aspect and that this describes the environs of Rennes les Bains. If this is true then whatever was or is hidden there is the primary significance of the Armature. I have only partially worked out the cartographic elements – certain elements remain elusive. Given the secrecy this implies that whatever is hidden is or was important".
Can a key found in a Cherisey parchment really date back to 1618 and suggest something hidden at Rennes les Bains and which has a relationship to Saint Sulpice?
Let us begin with the deposition of the Codex Bezae manuscript at Cambridge University in around 1581. Theodore Beza presented it to them as a gift. Presumably this would have been a valuable and important manuscript in the backdrop to the religious wars that were current then. Would those high calibre studets at the time (and even many years after 1581) interested in religion have been able to see the manuscript? Who attended the University as students at this time?
There was John Dee, from November 1542 to 1546 – who attended St. John's College, Cambridge. He was a student here long before the Codex reached Cambridge - but he was a very good friend of Francis Bacon. He may have seen the Codex in the 19 years when Beza had the manuscript. How? Because if he was a close friend of Bacon's, circumstantial evidence suggests he may have known Beza via the two Bacon brothers. His great abilities were recognised early on and he was made a founding fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. In the late 1540s and early 1550s he travelled around Europe, lecturing in Paris on Euclid. He studied with and became a close friend of the cartographer Gerardus Mercator, returning to England with an important collection of mathematical and astronomical instruments. In 1552, he met Gerolamo Cardano in London - Dee owned an important collection of maps, globes and astronomical instruments. Dee was an intensely pious Christian but his Christianity was deeply influenced by the Hermetic and Platonic-Pythagorean doctrines that were pervasive in the Renaissance. He believed that numbers were the basis of all things and the key to knowledge, that God's creation was an act of numbering. Through Hermeticism he believed that man had the potential for divine power and he believed this divine power could be exercised through mathematics. His ultimate goal was to help bring forth a unified world religion through the healing of the breach of the Catholic and Protestant churches and the recapture of the pure theology of the ancients. This indeed echoed the aims of the later Rosicrucians.
Francis Bacon himself entered the same Trinity College at Cambridge, on 5 April 1573 at the age of twelve, living for three years there with his older brother Anthony Bacon under the personal tutelage of Dr John Whitgift, future Archbishop of Canterbury. The Bacon's education was conducted largely in Latin and followed the medieval curriculum. It was at Cambridge that Francis met Queen Elizabeth, who was impressed by his precocious intellect, and was accustomed to calling him "the young Lord Keeper".
The Bacon family had long links with the Protestant movement and connections with that same Reformation movement in France. The father of Francis and Anthony Bacon was Sir Nicholas Bacon, a loyal English churchman who was interested in ecclesiastical matters and made suggestions for the better observation of doctrine and discipline in the church. He favoured closer links with foreign Protestants in France. Their mother, Anne Bacon, was a leading Lady-in-Waiting to Queen Elizabeth. Anne's religious views remained strongly Puritan and she called for the eradication of all Popery in the Church of England. Anne wrote many letters that were fervent with her passion for her Protestant beliefs.
Francis's brother Anthony traveled to France in 1580. While there, he served as an intelligencer reporting to English spymaster Sir Francis Walsingham, also a Protestant sympathiser. Walsingham in fact attended King's College, Cambridge, in 1548 with many other Protestants but as an undergraduate of high social status did not sit for a degree. From
1550 or 1551, he travelled in continental Europe, returning to England by 1552 to enrol at Gray's Inn, one of the qualifying bodies for English lawyers. Walsingham became active in soliciting support for the Huguenots in France and developed a friendly and close working relationship with Nicholas Throckmorton. In 1570 the Queen chose Walsingham to support the Huguenots in their negotiations with Charles IX of France. Charles was third son of King Henry II of France and Catherine de' Medici. One of their daughters married Henri of Navarre - who himself later married Marie de Medici. It is this Marie de Medici who entrusted to the younger painter Nicolas Poussin a secret mission. The mission was to her uncle the Grand Duke of Florence. The reason for this ‘mission’ has never been divulged. It was never discussed by Poussin during his whole life time. He did not even disclose it to his biographers.
Anthony Bacon lived with Beza for 5 months in 1581, the year that Beza gave the Codex Bezae to Cambridge. Anthony Bacon later travelled on the continent as an intelligencer for
Walsingham, Burghley and the Queen as stated above. Anthony, who left England in September 1579 for a ‘tour’ of the continent, sent back to his brother a constant stream of intelligence as well as a supply of books and manuscripts to support their literary work. He also helped to set up Francis’ special twelve-month journey (1581-2) to France, Spain, Italy, Germany and Denmark to observe people, places, culture and religion. When Anthony returned in 1592 from twelve years abroad as an intelligencer to aid Francis, a private scrivenery was established, funded mainly by Anthony’s modest inherited wealth together with a lot of borrowing. Francis referred to these helpers as his ‘good pens’. Anthony Bacon’s foreign contacts were widespread , and he enjoyed friendship in many high places. His contacts in France and friendship with Henri of Navarre, later Henri IV of France, as also the experience of his close association with Antonio Perez, the King of Spain’s Secretary of State. Perez, who defected and came to England in 1593, was supported financially by Anthony Bacon. (http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/essays/frameset-essays.html)
These ‘good pens’ included scholars, lawyers, university wits and poets who acted as secretaries, writers, translators, copyists and cryptographers, dealing with correspondence, translations, copying, ciphers, essays, books, plays, entertainments and masques. Whether they were all employed by Francis and Anthony, or simply collaborated voluntarily on certain
projects, we don’t know, but some of them certainly were directly employed. Names included in these projects included Philip Sidney, an English poet, courtier and soldier, who is remembered as one of the most prominent figures of the Elizabethan Age. His works include The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia. He later married Frances, the teenage daughter of Sir Francis Walsingham.
We can see that Beza mixed with minds who could indeed create a great mathematical cryptic code. Was it these minds that decided to encode something important? Something that in some way related to the much later Cherisey creating his Small Parchment? Something that was important and pertained to Rennes-le-Chateau? There must indeed be a connection somewhere - because the key found in the Small Parchment is that of Poussin and Teniers who also guard this 681 key. This same key can be found encoded at Saint Sulpice and was known to men around the time of the 1650's when this great church was rebuilt. Did Olier know of it?
If the Bacons and Beza were aware of something important in France, in the area of Arques, this may have been through Bacon's association with the Duke de Joyeuse (they owned the land that the so called Poussin tomb was built on in Arques).
I leave the last word to Paul Karren;
"Many clues suggest that this device [the 681 key] also has a cartographic aspect and that this describes the environs of Rennes les Bains. If this is true then whatever was or is hidden there is the primary significance of the Armature. I have only partially worked out the cartographic elements – certain elements remain elusive. Given the secrecy this implies that whatever is hidden is or was important".
Perhaps it is related to the folk legend of the important burial or burials in the environs of Rennes les Bains? Is it possible that it has a basis in truth? Abbe Henri Boudet certainly referred to this in his published works and Paul Karren has identified the hand of Boudet in the Parchments and the 681 key.
Perhaps it is not so strange then that the Small Parchment should carry cartographic elements and a 681 key for the area of Rennes les Bains. But what has it to do with Saint Sulpice? Why was Poussin involved? It seems impossible that Cherisey devised this code, pulled out all these strands of historical interest and connections with such precision independantly. And this code itself currently relates to the Small Parchment. Work has not even started on the Large Parchment - which promises to yield even more interesting results!
Notes (added 3/6/2013)
1] On reflection, i believe the reason now, that Cherisey may have picked this Codex is because of its links with a particular 'type' of church in France. This church within a church [if you will] is the one known as the Gallican Church. This church, described thus in an encyclopeadia is as follows:
"Gallican Church, a name given to the Roman Catholic Church in France, with special reference to the opposition which it formerly displayed to Papal claims. Christian churches must have been founded in Gaul before the latter part of the 2nd century A.D., for during the persecution under M. Aurelius, many suffered martyrdom at Lyons, including Pothinus, bishop of the town. Irenaeus, the successor of Pothinus, had been a disciple of Polycarp, and this fact, together with the constant connection maintained with Smyrna, and the general sympathy with Eastern views, leads to the conclusion that the Church of Gaul was mainly, if not entirely, of Asiatic origin. Like other branches of the Church, it advanced rapidly after the establishment of Christianity under Constantine; but it passed through a severe struggle during the invasion of the barbarian races, most of whom had already adopted the Arian form of Christianity. It was saved from the Arians by Clovis, and both he and his successors saw that a steady union with so strong an organisation was the surest means of maintaining the power of their own dynasty. As the power of the Papacy became established amidst the political and social confusion which followed the death of Charlemagne, the Church in France, as in other countries, sought to extend its own influence and authority by complete submission to the claims of the Roman See. The Pragmatic Sanction of 1269 subordinated the authority of the Pope to the common law of the country as well as the canons of councils, and the same course was pursued more boldly by Philip the Fair in his struggle with Boniface VIII. The degradation of the Papacy during the "Babylonish Captivity" led to still further limitations of its power. The enactments of general councils took the place of Papal decrees as the source of authority in ecclesiastical matters; by those of Constance and Basel, Church patronage was in great measure transferred from the Pope to the Crown, and the privileges thus gained were confirmed by the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges (1437). The concordat of 1516 gave the right of instituting bishops to the Pope, while that of nominating them was retained by the Crown; but the French people still looked back to the Pragmatic Sanction and the decrees on which it
was based as the most fitting expression of the relations which should exist between Church and State. The movement towards "Gallicism" reached its height in the reign of Louis XIV, who was determined to assert his supremacy in ecclesiastical as well as civil affairs. In his contest with Innocent XI concerning the Regalia (q.v.), he was supported by the eloquent and influential Bossuet (q.v.), who drew up the famous Declaration of the French clergy in 1682. This Declaration was condemned by several Popes, but the Crown maintained the same attitude up to the time of the Revolution. In 1790 an attempt was made by the "civil constitution of the clergy" to reorganise the Church on a democratic basis. At the same time a violent attack was made on ecclesiastical privileges; the clergy were deprived of their tithes, and the Church lands were confiscated. During the Reign of Terror public worship was suspended, and the Church for a time ceased to exist. By the concordat of Napoleon, then first consul, with Pius VII., in 1801, the Church was reestablished and public services were resumed; but most of the changes introduced during the early part of the Revolution were retained. In 1810 Napoleon, now emperor, returned to the Declaration of 1682. In 1817 there was a new concordat, by which that of 1516 was again recognised; but in 1826 a full assembly of bishops expressed their adhesion to the principles of 1682. In 1830 all creeds were placed on the same footing. The course generally followed by the State in ecclesiastical and religious matters since that date has completely alienated the Church, which is now decidedly Ultramontane (q.v.) in its tendencies. The strongest proof of this was given at the Vatican Council of 1870, when the French bishops accepted the doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope".
[http://www.encyclopedia123.com/G/GallicanChurch.html]
This Codex Bezae, an ancient text which originated in the East from the hands of Ireneaus, would have been highly prized by this Gallican church. Also, i see in the Gallican 'struggle' through history with the papacy, a reflection in the so called 'heresies' through the ages, which at their base have always had opposition to the power of the Pope in a secular world! The Gallican Church, in its own way, may even have considered itself the more original church than Rome itself. The conflict between the Monarchy and the Papal claims also seem to reflect the issues with were rife even up to Sauniere's time? Perhaps Sauniere, even, was a Gallican priest?
2] I do not believe, based on current evidence, that Cherisey was interested in the Codex Bezae for any possible family connection. Its an interesting aside that his ancestors married a Bezae, but ultimatley the main reason the Bezae was picked seems to be the Gaulish church and its relationship with the Asiatic church. The question is, why would Cherisey be interested in this Asiatic church and its origins and indeed, its ancient manuscripts?
3] The link must be because of its history. It was a text used by St Iranaeus and it is now thought the manuscript emerged early in a Greek speaking area before coming to the West. Some elements of the
text are found for example in Marcion. (Marcion was a bishop in early Christianity). All the evidence seems to suggest that in existence was a distinctly Western recension of the Gospel of Luke that circulated independantly to that of the other Gospels in the period before 313CE. The exemplar of the Codex Bezae was brought to Gaul around 170CE. There are historical links between Galatia and Gaul and the Codex has a long association with Southern Gaul, particularly Lyon. Supporting this scenario are two very important features
which are also present in other extant ancient manuscripts of the region. One feature for example is the use of a blue ink to write the manuscripts. This feature is only associated with Lyon.
There are also quotes from Irenaeus which are similar to the Codex Bezae even down to the citing of the same errors! Scrivener speculated that the Codex Bezae was brought into Gaul by Irenaeus and his asiatic companions about AD170. The Latin of the Codex is the feature that dates it to a Western province, no later than the 5th century. Most scholars are prepared to accept that the Codex was in the hands of Saint Polycarpe (he quoted from this text) and that his successor Irenaeus took the manuscript to Lyon when he became Bishop there.
Iraneus, who heard Polycarp speak in his youth, said Polycarp had been a disciple of John the Apostle [although we must point out that some strongly disagree with this, as Polycarp never once mentions his affiliation with the Beloved Disciple, an inexplicable omission if it was true). Saint Jerome wrote that Polycarp was a disciple of John and that John had ordained him bishop of Smyrna. The early tradition that ... linked Polycarp .... with John the Apostle who, though many people had tried to kill him, was not martyred but died of old age after being exiled to the island of Patmos, is embodied in the Coptic language fragmentary papyri (the "Harris fragments") dating to the 3rd to 6th centuries. Frederick Weidmann, interprets the "Harris fragments" as Smyrnan hagiography addressing Smyrna-Ephesus church rivalries, which "develops the association of Polycarp and John to a degree unwitnessed, so far as we know, either before or since". This Gallican church, in its Asiatic origins, can be traced back to John the Apostle, also known as the Beloved Disciple of Christ.
John the Apostle was one of the Twelve Apostles of Jesus according to The Bible. He was the son of Zebedee
and Salome and brother of James, son of Zebedee, another of the Twelve Apostles. Christian tradition holds that he outlived the remaining apostles—all of whom suffered martyrdom. The Church Fathers consider him the same person as John the Evangelist, John of Patmos, and the Beloved Disciple. The Church Fathers generally identify him as the author of five books in the New Testament: the Gospel of John, three Epistles of John, and the Book of Revelation.
1] On reflection, i believe the reason now, that Cherisey may have picked this Codex is because of its links with a particular 'type' of church in France. This church within a church [if you will] is the one known as the Gallican Church. This church, described thus in an encyclopeadia is as follows:
"Gallican Church, a name given to the Roman Catholic Church in France, with special reference to the opposition which it formerly displayed to Papal claims. Christian churches must have been founded in Gaul before the latter part of the 2nd century A.D., for during the persecution under M. Aurelius, many suffered martyrdom at Lyons, including Pothinus, bishop of the town. Irenaeus, the successor of Pothinus, had been a disciple of Polycarp, and this fact, together with the constant connection maintained with Smyrna, and the general sympathy with Eastern views, leads to the conclusion that the Church of Gaul was mainly, if not entirely, of Asiatic origin. Like other branches of the Church, it advanced rapidly after the establishment of Christianity under Constantine; but it passed through a severe struggle during the invasion of the barbarian races, most of whom had already adopted the Arian form of Christianity. It was saved from the Arians by Clovis, and both he and his successors saw that a steady union with so strong an organisation was the surest means of maintaining the power of their own dynasty. As the power of the Papacy became established amidst the political and social confusion which followed the death of Charlemagne, the Church in France, as in other countries, sought to extend its own influence and authority by complete submission to the claims of the Roman See. The Pragmatic Sanction of 1269 subordinated the authority of the Pope to the common law of the country as well as the canons of councils, and the same course was pursued more boldly by Philip the Fair in his struggle with Boniface VIII. The degradation of the Papacy during the "Babylonish Captivity" led to still further limitations of its power. The enactments of general councils took the place of Papal decrees as the source of authority in ecclesiastical matters; by those of Constance and Basel, Church patronage was in great measure transferred from the Pope to the Crown, and the privileges thus gained were confirmed by the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges (1437). The concordat of 1516 gave the right of instituting bishops to the Pope, while that of nominating them was retained by the Crown; but the French people still looked back to the Pragmatic Sanction and the decrees on which it
was based as the most fitting expression of the relations which should exist between Church and State. The movement towards "Gallicism" reached its height in the reign of Louis XIV, who was determined to assert his supremacy in ecclesiastical as well as civil affairs. In his contest with Innocent XI concerning the Regalia (q.v.), he was supported by the eloquent and influential Bossuet (q.v.), who drew up the famous Declaration of the French clergy in 1682. This Declaration was condemned by several Popes, but the Crown maintained the same attitude up to the time of the Revolution. In 1790 an attempt was made by the "civil constitution of the clergy" to reorganise the Church on a democratic basis. At the same time a violent attack was made on ecclesiastical privileges; the clergy were deprived of their tithes, and the Church lands were confiscated. During the Reign of Terror public worship was suspended, and the Church for a time ceased to exist. By the concordat of Napoleon, then first consul, with Pius VII., in 1801, the Church was reestablished and public services were resumed; but most of the changes introduced during the early part of the Revolution were retained. In 1810 Napoleon, now emperor, returned to the Declaration of 1682. In 1817 there was a new concordat, by which that of 1516 was again recognised; but in 1826 a full assembly of bishops expressed their adhesion to the principles of 1682. In 1830 all creeds were placed on the same footing. The course generally followed by the State in ecclesiastical and religious matters since that date has completely alienated the Church, which is now decidedly Ultramontane (q.v.) in its tendencies. The strongest proof of this was given at the Vatican Council of 1870, when the French bishops accepted the doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope".
[http://www.encyclopedia123.com/G/GallicanChurch.html]
This Codex Bezae, an ancient text which originated in the East from the hands of Ireneaus, would have been highly prized by this Gallican church. Also, i see in the Gallican 'struggle' through history with the papacy, a reflection in the so called 'heresies' through the ages, which at their base have always had opposition to the power of the Pope in a secular world! The Gallican Church, in its own way, may even have considered itself the more original church than Rome itself. The conflict between the Monarchy and the Papal claims also seem to reflect the issues with were rife even up to Sauniere's time? Perhaps Sauniere, even, was a Gallican priest?
2] I do not believe, based on current evidence, that Cherisey was interested in the Codex Bezae for any possible family connection. Its an interesting aside that his ancestors married a Bezae, but ultimatley the main reason the Bezae was picked seems to be the Gaulish church and its relationship with the Asiatic church. The question is, why would Cherisey be interested in this Asiatic church and its origins and indeed, its ancient manuscripts?
3] The link must be because of its history. It was a text used by St Iranaeus and it is now thought the manuscript emerged early in a Greek speaking area before coming to the West. Some elements of the
text are found for example in Marcion. (Marcion was a bishop in early Christianity). All the evidence seems to suggest that in existence was a distinctly Western recension of the Gospel of Luke that circulated independantly to that of the other Gospels in the period before 313CE. The exemplar of the Codex Bezae was brought to Gaul around 170CE. There are historical links between Galatia and Gaul and the Codex has a long association with Southern Gaul, particularly Lyon. Supporting this scenario are two very important features
which are also present in other extant ancient manuscripts of the region. One feature for example is the use of a blue ink to write the manuscripts. This feature is only associated with Lyon.
There are also quotes from Irenaeus which are similar to the Codex Bezae even down to the citing of the same errors! Scrivener speculated that the Codex Bezae was brought into Gaul by Irenaeus and his asiatic companions about AD170. The Latin of the Codex is the feature that dates it to a Western province, no later than the 5th century. Most scholars are prepared to accept that the Codex was in the hands of Saint Polycarpe (he quoted from this text) and that his successor Irenaeus took the manuscript to Lyon when he became Bishop there.
Iraneus, who heard Polycarp speak in his youth, said Polycarp had been a disciple of John the Apostle [although we must point out that some strongly disagree with this, as Polycarp never once mentions his affiliation with the Beloved Disciple, an inexplicable omission if it was true). Saint Jerome wrote that Polycarp was a disciple of John and that John had ordained him bishop of Smyrna. The early tradition that ... linked Polycarp .... with John the Apostle who, though many people had tried to kill him, was not martyred but died of old age after being exiled to the island of Patmos, is embodied in the Coptic language fragmentary papyri (the "Harris fragments") dating to the 3rd to 6th centuries. Frederick Weidmann, interprets the "Harris fragments" as Smyrnan hagiography addressing Smyrna-Ephesus church rivalries, which "develops the association of Polycarp and John to a degree unwitnessed, so far as we know, either before or since". This Gallican church, in its Asiatic origins, can be traced back to John the Apostle, also known as the Beloved Disciple of Christ.
John the Apostle was one of the Twelve Apostles of Jesus according to The Bible. He was the son of Zebedee
and Salome and brother of James, son of Zebedee, another of the Twelve Apostles. Christian tradition holds that he outlived the remaining apostles—all of whom suffered martyrdom. The Church Fathers consider him the same person as John the Evangelist, John of Patmos, and the Beloved Disciple. The Church Fathers generally identify him as the author of five books in the New Testament: the Gospel of John, three Epistles of John, and the Book of Revelation.